User talk:ArthurPSmith/Archive/5

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

P159 and GRID imports[edit]

Hi, any progress on setting P159 during your GRID imports? I think it is technically possible to extract this data from GRID items and it is a pity not to do it. I think that even simple OpenRefine reconciliation may produce data for P159 with 90% accuracy. I think is easier to fix errors (it is possible to track errors using queries to compare P625 from GRID with P625 of P159 item), than doing two separate imports. If there is a technical problem, we can simply ask community for help.--Jklamo (talk) 10:21, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jklamo: User:Pintoch has been working on this - see Wikidata talk:WikiProject Universities/External databases. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:17, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jklamo: OpenRefine reconciliation via GeoNames id works very well in my experience (without the GeoNames ids, there are quite a lot of ambiguous cases actually, even when refining by country…) I used to do these edits from this account but I realized that it was not appreciated to flood the recent changes and watchlists. So I have applied for a bot flag on User:PintochBot and will do the edits as soon as I get it. − Pintoch (talk) 15:00, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Pintoch: Great, nice to hear that. If there is anything I can help with, just let me know.--Jklamo (talk) 20:46, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jklamo: the import is running. Not all the locations from GRID are imported - there are still a few thousand locations that I have not reconciled to Wikidata. Unfortunately reconciliation via Geonames is spoiled by cebwiki items so I am not entirely happy with this batch, but most of the edits look good as far as I can tell. − Pintoch (talk) 09:19, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Pintoch: Great, already noticed! Most of the edits looks very well, I also appreciate the parent/subsidiary imports. Just one thing, for organizations (universities, ministries, etc.) P159 is more appropriate than P131.--Jklamo (talk) 14:30, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jklamo: Yes, unfortunately the types in GRID are quite uninformative so it is hard to get this right. And it is also subject to interpretation to some extent… (What about hospitals? Research labs/groups/institutes?) I just used Arthur's heuristics from Wikidata talk:WikiProject Universities/External databases but I really do not mind if someone migrates some P131 to P159 (personally I always use both in my queries because I find the distinction unreliable). − Pintoch (talk) 14:50, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Pintoch: Any plans to run P159 import again after recent GRID import (noticed 700+ new constraint violations).--Jklamo (talk) 09:53, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jklamo: yes, I have been waiting for UK Provider Reference Number (P4971) to be created (which I have just done), so that I can import that in the same go. It should happen in the next few days. So, if I just add the headquarters location (P159) claims, a bot should migrate the coordinates in these claims, right? Is it better if I add the coordinates as qualifiers directly, or if I leave the bot add them? − Pintoch (talk) 10:02, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Pintoch: Yes, bot is migrating coordinates to the P159, but it is better to add the coordinates as qualifiers directly, to avoid constraint violations (and avoid spoiling property usage statistic, which are the basis for property suggesting tools like Recoin).--Jklamo (talk) 10:39, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ola[edit]

Olá amigo estou tentando construir uma entidade chamada a Israel Lucas Góis ele é um investidor muito conhecido aqui no Brasil o grande problema é que toda vez que cria uma entidade um administrador chamado Pasleim, excluir a página acabei brigando com ele e ele está me perseguindo não deixando o efetuar nada, Você poderia por favor me ajudar a criar essa entidade GRUPO CALIMA DIESEL (talk) 02:56, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to recommend you start with a ptwiki page rather than an item in wikidata, but it looks like that's been done - Q45803705. Let me know if there's still a problem here. ArthurPSmith (talk) 13:48, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Religions, metaclasses and instances[edit]

Hi, you recently reverted one of my edit on Taoism (Q9598) (diff: [1]), but I'm not sure to fully agree. We're trying to sort out religions within the Project Religions and the (current (weak)) consensus is to use subclass of (P279), for the reasons explained on the Ontology. Could you please read the explanations and discuss your point of view, if you feel the ontology is wrong? — nojhan (✐) 10:07, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, nice! I wasn't aware of that - I've just been trying to clean up cases where we had both A P31 B and A P279 B, and trying to delete the one that seemed to be less common. But I'll fix this and look at some other cases too, I think you have the right approach there. ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:09, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks for the kind revert! — nojhan (✐) 09:14, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata External ID redirector for EU VAT number[edit]

Hi Arthur,

Is it possible to add EU VAT number (P3608) on your service?

The URL is like this: http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/vies/vatResponse.html?memberStateCode=$1&number=$2

$1 is for the country code (first two letters) and $2 is for the digits.

For example: BE0466745984 → $1: BE, $2: 0466745984 → http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/vies/vatResponse.html?memberStateCode=BE&number=0466745984

Thank you in advance. Tubezlob (🙋) 18:32, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Tubezlob: yes that looks doable - I'll take a look, probably next week (new year). ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:46, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes of course, thank you! Tubezlob (🙋) 09:10, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Tubezlob: Ok this is done, and I've updated P3608 with the new URL. You may have to edit or append "?action=purge" to pages to see the new formatter URL in action. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:37, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
OK thank you very much and happy new year! Tubezlob (🙋) 19:01, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Textiles and fibers[edit]

I've just started trying to clean up fibers and the textiles made from them. They are very messy right now. I am using Getty AAT as a source for class hierarchy and Fairchild's Dictionary of Textiles (Q28888841) as a general reference. So far I've done "wool" and its subclasses. I'd really like your opinion on classes and instances - I always struggle with when "substances" can be instances.

Many editors seem to feel that materials like named fabrics ("tartan", "naugahyde", etc.) are <instance of> textile (Q28823). Does this seem right to you, or should <instance of> textile (Q28823) be reserved for individual tapestries, fabric samples, and other unique objects?

In the same vein, I am trying to decide whether a fiber can be an <instance of>. So far I have a class hierarchy like this:

  • fiber > natural fiber > animal fiber > wool > merino (based on AAT with a few logical additions).

I also have:

  • fiber > textile fiber > wool > merino

fiber (Q3071311) isn't in AAT, but it's widely used in the industry and appears in many Wikipedias. My question is, does it make sense to say wool, mohair, merino, etc. are all <instances of> "textile fiber" rather than subclassses? I can make a case either way.

I'd appreciate your thoughts on this! Thanks and best wishes for the new year. - PKM (talk) 21:40, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@PKM: Thanks for asking! So as a general rule, P279 (subclass) is the preferred relation between a narrower and broader term when they are both abstract concepts that refer to the same general "type" of thing. If you interpose a P31 (instance) relation in the middle of an abstract sequence of that sort, then the concepts on one side of the P31 are implicitly of a different "type" than the ones on the other side; we sometimes call the broader concepts there "metaclasses", as their instances are themselves classes. It is arguably ok to do this in many cases like this one, but one needs to pick a reasonable boundary between classes and metaclasses that all could agree on. If "fiber" (or "textile fiber") can not reasonably be thought of as a metaclass, that is its instances should be individual fibers rather than classes of fibers, then you should just use subclass across the whole range of relations here. On the other hand if it seems the concept is being used in wikidata consistently in a metaclass fashion then you could make that more explicit by relabeling "fiber" as "type of fiber" or "class of fiber" etc. ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:55, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that excellent explanation. I think I am beginning to understand metaclasses now (the concept always confused me before, since it seems like most higher-order classes in Wikidata could be described as metaclasses). I'm still learning this stuff!
A couple of questions: If I decide that "textile fiber" should be a metaclass "class of fibers used in making yarn, fabric, or other textiles", can a class and its subclass both be instances of the metaclass? That is, can "wool" be <instance of> textile fiber and "merino" be both <subclass of> wool and <instance of> textile fiber, or is that bad ontology? And also, can a metaclass be a subclass of something that isn't a metaclass? - PKM (talk) 19:59, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It does sometimes tax the brain to sort these things out clearly! In your example, yes I think that's fine for both "wool" and "merino" (subclass of wool) to be an instance of "textile fiber". In general a metaclass should be a subclass of another metaclass, although it could be a subclass of a variable-order metaclass or something more complicated as sometimes those things are needed. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:56, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again! Much to ponder here. - PKM (talk) 20:29, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Update: after working with fibers and textiles for a few weeks, I decided to make "textile fiber" a metaclass. Thanks for your guidance. - PKM (talk) 20:32, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ptable[edit]

Hi Arthur, I plan to push some commits for ptable. Before that, I have some question. I clone the repo and try to test the tool in local. However I do not how to it because I opened index.html or nuclides.html and the page that appears contains a lot of un-interpreted code. What is the rpocedure to have a working ptable in local? Thanks in advance. Pamputt (talk) 20:17, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's python - as I recall you have to run python app.py - it starts a local flask server with a particular port number you can point to and see. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:27, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Pamputt: to make sure you see this! ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:27, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It works! Now I just have to work . Thanks. Pamputt (talk) 20:29, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arthur, I submitted a simple patch but it is not yet applied. Could you explain me what are the steps before the patch is in use? This is a really simple patch and I plan to add other feature (dislay other nuclear data in the tooltip box, (un)zoom using scroll button, ...) but I want to know all the processes before doing a big job. Pamputt (talk) 22:09, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe Ricordisamoa could also reply to these questions. Pamputt (talk) 22:10, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Pamputt: sorry I've only had a couple of days back at my office where I can work on this (due to travel and weather etc). I'll try to take a look tomorrow! I think @Ricordisamoa: has to do the actual installation and restart etc (at least I haven't done this for this app before). ArthurPSmith (talk) 22:39, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Pamputt: Thank you for the patch, I have merged it and look forward to the bigger ones! (You can use Phabricator to draft proposals.) And yes, the development+deployment process should really be documented (part of phab:T99847) --Ricordisamoa 23:11, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ricordisamoa: thanks for the merge. For the coming patch, they are not yet ready. I cannot promise to push them soon because I have other stuff to do before. Anyway, I hope I will be able to push my commits before June. I will ping you at that time. Pamputt (talk) 08:28, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Pamputt: Please take your time --Ricordisamoa 10:29, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Awards and classification, what is an award ?[edit]

Taking about https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q5204895&oldid=prev&diff=628083726 . I try for a while to root our « class or not » principle in a well founded manner and powerful principle. This means, for example, using the type/token distinction to identify « tokens » that are classified into (first order) « classes ». Did you read the wikipedia article on it, or User:TomT0m/Classification ?. This leads to consistency with other ontologies and predictability - several people starting from the same principles are likely to reach the same conclusion without talking to each other. Also it adds consistency in the way we treat awards themselves, so it makes querying easier.

I think the tokens at sake here, are the moment where someone (or a whole group or team) is awarded. This is what we should classify, I think, in the first place - let’s call them « awardment ». That makes any award a class of awardment, as usually there is several awardments of that type. Awardments can be classified further, such as « 2018 Nobel Price », a subclass of « Nobel price », or « Peace Nobel price », also a subclass of Nobel Price. This model works as well for a price delivered once, it’s just a class of award with a single awardment.

If there is needs that are not captured by this model, we can add a classification level and add class of classes of awards, like « recurring award » - an award class which the awardees are chosen recurringly at a timely manner, for example.

I think this model has a lot of qualities. What do you think ? What’s the principle that guides you into deciding what is a class or not ?author  TomT0m / talk page 08:27, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An "award" or "prize" to me is inherently a recurring thing that can be given to multiple people either simultaneously or over time. There are a very small number like Orteig Prize (Q1930819) that are one-time only, but I don't think that negates the general rule here. The receipt of a particular award by a particular person at a particular point in time is an event - I don't know if there's an English word for it; let's call it "awardment" as you suggest. So such an event would be an instance of "awardment". The actual award or prize that is given is (generally) a recurring thing, and is a member of the class of "awards" just as the awardee is the member of the class of humans. It may be a member of a subclass of "awards" also. The Nobel prizes are given in different categories, so Nobel prize as a whole is a class of awards, but the individual categories (Nobel prize in medicine, for instance) is an *instance* of Nobel prize (which subclass award). These distinctions seem pretty clear to me. ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:49, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@ArthurPSmith: «  is a member of the class of "awards" just as the awardee is the member of the class of humans. It may be a member of a subclass of "awards" also » This seems to indicate a problem in how you see thing. It’s not possible in general to be both a subclass and an instance of the same class.
« The actual award or prize that is given is (generally) a recurring thing » You have a thing that is given several times ? that would mean the last to get it transfer it to the new one … This means imho that each award is unique. What is recurring is the awardment, as an event who can recur …
Other problem : what would be a superclass of « award » in your model ? Is this an event, as the awardment, the trophy or the money that is given in awardment, an organisation as the Nobel committee ? If it’s an event, then it is easy to assimilate award and awardment, and the reason that there is no word for awardemnt in english is that … there is : it’s award https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/award
In my model, there is no exception at all to the rule, it has none of the problem I exposed above. It’s clear and systematic, and do not need parasit concept. It’s also consistent with common definition in english. author  TomT0m / talk page 16:08, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@TomT0m: What exactly is your model? P31 is never used at all for awards? You misinterpret what I said above when you claim I was saying an award is "both a subclass and an instance of the same class", that's not what I was saying at all. A specific award is a member (P31) of the class "award", or possibly a member (P31) of a subclass (like "Nobel Prize"). Note that medals such as "Purple Heart" are (in wikidata now) considered an instance of "medal" which is a subclass of "award". This makes perfect sense to me. An award is like a work, it has (generally) many manifestations in the form of individual objects obtained by individual people at particular points in time. We document these individual "awardments" with award received (P166), there's no need generally to recognize them with their own wikidata items. As to superclass, probably artificial object (Q16686448) would be better than object (Q488383), but both are rather generic/abstract anyway. ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:25, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(I was writing a lenghty answer but I’ll leave it for later, a remark first) The enwiki says : « An award is something given to a person, a group of people, like a sports team, or an organization in recognition of their excellence in a certain field. ». I think our model should not invent its own definition and follow the basic definitions. It follows from that definition that the « Peace Nobel price 2017 » is an instance of « award » : the « Peace Nobel price 2017 » is something that is given to a person, a group of people, like a sports team, or an organization in recognition of their excellence in a certain field. Any example of Nobel prize, like « Peace Nobel price 2017 », is also an award on that definition. It follows that « Nobel prize » is a subclass of « award ». It’s as simple as this. The same for « medals ». Medals are just specific kind of awards, so
⟨ medal ⟩ subclass of (P279) View with SQID ⟨ award ⟩
. That’s it. It’s hard to be less precise and conceptually economic and consistent with external definitions, we should not invent our own square wheel when it’s not needed. author  TomT0m / talk page 17:30, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think I'm inventing my own definition here, it's common sense and to my mind fully agrees with what you quote from enwiki. However, you seem to be making a distinction between "Nobel Peace Prize 2017" (which would be P31 "award" in your model?) and "Nobel Peace Prize" (which would be "P279" "award" in your model?). Do you think we should have a wikidata item for "Nobel Peace Prize 2017" (and every other year)? I don't think that's tenable - especially when you look at other cases like medals (for which a given medal may have hundreds of thousands of "awardment" events). The important thing here, just as with works, is to describe the (yes, abstract) award with its criteria, its selection committee, the monetary or concrete object associated with the award, the frequency of recurrence, etc. Every "award" has such well-defined attributes which make it distinct from every other "award", and that's why it's an instance (P31) of "award", in my view (which I think is just expressing common sense on this). This is the same approach we take with books, music, and other created entities. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:00, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This would be entailing we have to sacrifice some kind of rigor to represent stuffs correctly. I don’t think so. We don’t need to sacrifice rigor to implement something easy to use. We just have to make a distinction between awards type (I think I created something like a « recurring award type » item for « Nobel price » and all the alike to be an instance of, so a metaclass modelling approach) and award token, and allow « award recieved » to have as domain either an instance of « recurring award type » or an instance of « award ». Actually the « recurring » pattern is much more than just award, (I did play with this in the past, see WikiProject Recurring events. author  TomT0m / talk page 11:48, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
With all due respect. Nobel Peace Prize 2017 is not an award. This is obvious from its potential associated statements like announcement date, presentations date, location of presentation and the like. In the same way taking it from a point of view of rigor, a member of parliament is a position but a MB for the Xth session is not. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 05:03, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OpenRefine problem[edit]

Hi, I've been having a go with OpenRefine (Windows, v. 2.8 trunk) for some of the terms in the Getty AAT thesaurus (Art & Architecture Thesaurus ID (P1014)).

I'm finding that occasionally when I try to reconcile a column, I get a "Working..." pop-up that never goes away.

Looking at the service log screen, it seems that it's sending a "guess cells type" request for the first 10 cells, and https://tools.wmflabs.org/openrefine-wikidata/api is sending back a "Forbidden 403" error.

(Ironically, I don't even want a cell type -- the items I'm looking for are actually classes, so mostly shouldn't be instance of (P31) anything.)

At the same time, it seems to handle other columns from the same project without any trouble. But sometimes there's a column it just doesn't seem to like, nor even facets from it.

Is this something you've ever encountered; any idea what might be causing it; or any idea of a fix? Jheald (talk) 15:13, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jheald: @Pintoch: is the real expert on it - however I have seen problems similar to what you describe; it may be a memory issue? Also note that the project is under active development; there might have been a change in the version you are using that broke something, so you could try updating to the latest git version or going back a few days to a more stable version. The version I've mostly been using recently (which seems to work fine) is dated February 9th, if that helps. ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:31, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I was just using the official release 2.8 from 19 November. Is there much new, fixed, or otherwise worth having more recently ?
I'd be surprised if it were a memory issue -- the request seems quite small, and it's the wmflabs service that seems to be rejecting it, rather than OpenRefine itself failing. Plus it's this initial query that's falling over, not a later stage. My assumption was that there might be a value in one of the fields that was breaking it. But I haven't yet found a way to work round it. Jheald (talk) 15:39, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jheald: sorry, yes I am aware of this bug: it is tracked here: https://github.com/wetneb/openrefine-wikidata/issues/19. If you can find any reliable way to reproduce it I would be very interested. I will try to find the time to improve these error messages to make this debugging easier. − Pintoch (talk) 15:45, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Pintoch: Most strange. It seems in this case it was specifically a cell containing the string "vector graphics" in the first 10 that caused this. When I blank that single cell, the reconciliation works. When I type back in the string "vector graphics", it fails. Jheald (talk) 16:06, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Adding "vector graphics" at the top of a column in a different project also made its reconciliation fail, so this may be something that is reproducible. Jheald (talk) 16:33, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, a project that only has one cell, which contains the text "vector graphics", will trigger the problem. But "tor" or "tor gra" don't, so I'll be fascinated to know what it is about this string that causes it to be rejected. Jheald (talk) 16:51, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Pintoch, Jheald: - looks like the problem is because vector graphics (Q170130) is P31 "unknown value". ??? ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:56, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes indeed! I just fixed that. https://tools.wmflabs.org/openrefine-wikidata/en/api?query=vector%20graphics works fine now. Thank you so much to both of you for your help! − Pintoch (talk) 17:03, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata:Property proposal/Aicte Institute ID[edit]

Thankyou for supporting. What next level. What all process/time goes on before creating the Property. Jinoytommanjaly (talk) 07:33, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jinoytommanjaly: properties cannot be approved before 1 week after initially proposed. For ID properties like yours, just one or two supporting comments is generally sufficient, so I expect it will move ahead in the next day or two. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:04, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OpenRefine feedback[edit]

Hi!

I have polished up the wikidata extension for OpenRefine that I had asked you to test a while ago - it should compile fine (and hopefully even work) this time. If you have some time to check it out, I would really like to know what you think. The discussion is happening here: https://github.com/OpenRefine/OpenRefine/pull/1530.

All the best − Pintoch (talk) 20:46, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reply edit summary[edit]

Sorry, the edit summary on edit 653212109 on WD:Property proposal/hearing date was supposed to say "reply: yes you're right". The apostrophe is so dangerously close to the enter key... esbranson (talk) 01:49, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey[edit]

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.

Thank you!

WMF Surveys, 18:57, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

edition number (P393) in references[edit]

Hey Arthur, I see that your bot added almost 30k edition number (P393) reference claims to GRID ID (P2427) claims in 2016/2017 (query), but this property is no longer supposed to be used in references. It probably never was, but meanwhile the constraint property constraint (P2302): used for values only constraint (Q21528958) explicitly states that. The values of those reference claims are apparently dates in format YYYY-MM-DD. What does this mean? Would it be possible to keep the value, but move the reference property from edition number (P393) to publication date (P577) or retrieved (P813)? —MisterSynergy (talk) 21:54, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MisterSynergy: GRID identifies the version of the database by the release date, in that format. See their download page. However, I've been using a new format for these citations recently, with "stated in" pointing to the specific version; I guess it would be fine for a bot to fix up the old ones but I'm not sure the best way to do this. ArthurPSmith (talk) 22:30, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the new format seems suitable. Since the situation with the violations is rather simple, I suggest to move the old references to the new model as well. It is more a matter of time than of complexity, due to the large amount of affected items with the same problem. One would just have to loop over all affected references and replace the edition number (P393) claim with a stated in (P248) claim. Do you have such code, or could develop it? —MisterSynergy (talk) 05:42, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: I’m now about to do this so that all references follow the new style (stated in: specific GRID edition item). New items for missing releases were already created, and very soon I’ll have the repair bot code as well. Cheers, MisterSynergy (talk) 08:17, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! Thanks, I've been worrying about when I would get a chance to get on this, so I appreciate you fixing it. Go ahead! ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:55, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Code is ready, but there are questions in relation to this sample edit:
  • There are at least occasionally references to several GRID releases. Should we keep all of them?
  • There are sometimes plain links to GRID releases with reference URL (P854). Should we keep them as well if there is another reference to another GRID release in the same statement?
Both phenomena can be observed in the sample edit. I’d just do it as you prefer. —MisterSynergy (talk) 21:32, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@MisterSynergy: The reference URL (P854) entry there was added by me via quickstatements, that was all I knew how to do at the time. The other two were bot actions. I don't think we have edition items for those early GRID releases; it's ok with me to just leave them as a reference URL link. Alternatively it would also be ok with me to just keep the most recent "stated in" reference and remove earlier links to GRID altogether. I don't think it hurts to keep all of them as it is slightly more informative about when the organization was present in the database, but if you think it's better to just have a single reference I have no strong feelings on this. ArthurPSmith (talk) 13:53, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I’m now just doing the replacement of references containing edition number (P393), no removals. —MisterSynergy (talk) 14:15, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This has just finished. I also fixed the bare URL references mentioned earlier to the new “stated in: specific GRID release” format. Still no removals, so some GRID IDs now have references to different GRID releases. —MisterSynergy (talk) 08:15, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata:Requests for comment/Privacy and Living People[edit]

You are receiving this message because you commented at the above RFC. There are additional proposals that have been made there that you are welcome to comment on. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:50, 9 April 2018 (UTC) (for Rschen7754)[reply]

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey[edit]

Every response for this survey can help the Wikimedia Foundation improve your experience on the Wikimedia projects. So far, we have heard from just 29% of Wikimedia contributors. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes to be completed. Take the survey now.

If you have already taken the survey, we are sorry you've received this reminder. We have design the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. If you wish to opt-out of the next reminder or any other survey, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thanks!

WMF Surveys, 01:40, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey[edit]

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 23 April, 2018 (07:00 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We will not bother you again. We have designed the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. To opt-out of future surveys, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement.

WMF Surveys, 00:50, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Possible WikiProject for year discussion[edit]

I have inquired at Wikidata talk:WikiProject Calendar Dates#Expand to cover year items? to see if that project would like to be a more enduring place to discuss and document the year-related discussions currently going on at Wikidata:Project chat. Since you have participated, I wanted to invite you to the discussion. Perhaps we shouldn't advertise the WikiProject in Project chat until a consensus emerges about whether the WikiProject wants to take on years or not. Jc3s5h (talk) 21:06, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Municipality vs administrative territorial entity[edit]

Thanks for pointing this out to me [2]. I was trying to fix the constraint error in London Borough of Newham (Q208139)local dialing code (P473)"020" and similar constraint errors in other boroughs in the UK. Where should I make the change? Deryck Chan (talk) 14:33, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Deryck Chan: sounds like the property constraint on local dialing code (P473) should be changed to allow any "administrative territorial entity", not just a municipality. Assuming a borough of London cannot be classed as a municipality? ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:36, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Accidentally undoing your edit[edit]

Hi Hi. Sorry for accidentally undoing your edit on Lexeme:L298, I was actually intending on undoing edits on linked Items and Properties. Adam Shorland (WMDE) (talk) 10:09, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Adam Shorland (WMDE): Thanks for fixing it. I notice you also reverted several property statements that linked to lexemes (these were generally the property examples which is important for people to know how the property is intended to be used). I understand there are database issues or something along those lines requiring these to be gone for the moment, will you be able to restore those when it's ok to have them again? ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:50, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We will re asses the situation today and see if we can re add the statements to Properties. As for on Items, https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T195615 will be the ticket to follow. Adam Shorland (WMDE) (talk) 08:22, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Due to a US holiday today (Monday) this will be pushed back to Tuesday. Adam Shorland (WMDE) (talk) 18:00, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eurovision Song Contest[edit]

It isn't a script, but manual edit. Sorry --ValterVB (talk) 18:28, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P5094[edit]

Hi Arthur. Is there a tweak that could be made to the formatting regex of HPIP ID (P5094) so that two-digit numbers aren't flagged, please? I suspect that the unique value constraint isn't 100% applicable here, but we can see how that goes. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:58, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sounding like Tobias[edit]

Hi. I'm not amused by what you said about me in project chat. I don't know what is the exact user name or IP adresses of this particular blocked user that you are referring to. I don't know what similar subject this user edited/discussed in a similar manner that I did, or whatever makes you think I'm this user. I also don't feel like I have to prove that I'm not a camel. I believe the norm is to provide the behavioral evidence at appropriate venue (instead of discrediting me at some generic topic), should you carry on insisting this. 90.191.81.65 18:59, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(A) I don't see that I "discredited" you in any way, and (B) the reason for my saying you "sounded like Tobias" was because you are using editing via an IP address rather than an account, and yet making assertions that sound like you should be an authority on wikidata. I'm sorry, without an account and a history, you simply cannot argue from "authority" here. You may have a good argument, and I think I pointed out to Chris there what the issue was, but you can't force your opinion on others. ArthurPSmith (talk) 21:05, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Télescope géant[edit]

Hi,

You reverted a modification on Wikidata. My point is that "Extrêmement grand télescope" is as good French as "Telescope extremely large" is good English. Besides, the French equivalent is "Télescope géant" (literally "giant telescope"), as is used by the ESO (http://www.eso.org/public/france/teles-instr/elt/?lang) and the French article.

However, I acknowledge that for some reason (unknown to me), wikidata seemed unable to match "Télescope géant" to its article.

Therefore, I invite you to help me correcting this problem. Otherwise I'll just revert your revert. Padex (talk) 09:13, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Padex: I left your label change alone, that was fine. What I reverted was your change to a statement - instance of (P31) which previously pointed to a separate item extremely large telescope (Q2665569). That item is a generic "extremely large" category, as opposed to the specific telescope with that name. It sounds like the French label on extremely large telescope (Q2665569) should be fixed - please go ahead and fix it! But note that is an abstract item, not specifically about the ELT. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:18, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) Hope I did it right this time. To answer your worries : yes, "télescope géant" seems to be the generic equivalent of "extremely large telescope" (not specifically the ELT). For instance the ESO does not translate ELT as a name. Padex (talk) 16:25, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that looks right, thanks for improving Wikidata! ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:09, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

peninsula of location[edit]

Hi ArthurPSmith. I created Wikidata:Property proposal/peninsula of location similar to Property:P5130 (island of location). Can you support it? 91.227.222.7 15:10, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

rollback[edit]

Would you like to request the rollback flag at WD:RFOR to help with those undoings? Mahir256 (talk) 17:09, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mahir256: I was actually doing that just now! ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:10, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]


New properties[edit]

Hello. Would you initiate one or a few new properties for me? Wikidata:Property proposal/Institut culturel de Bretagne ID, Wikidata:Property proposal/Interbibly ID, Wikidata:Property proposal/Le Monde ID, Wikidata:Property proposal/Tebeosfera ID and Wikidata:Property proposal/CSDE Lynching Database ID are all ready to be created and I'm ready to add statements if you agree to just create them. Thierry Caro (talk) 20:41, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Thierry Caro: Ok, I added the ones that hadn't already been done. They still need some work - constraints etc. for example. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:57, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. If you have time for Wikidata:Property proposal/Tebeosfera character ID, which is the companion to Tebeosfera ID (P5562)… Thierry Caro (talk) 15:45, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok! ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:57, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I'm coming back to you because I have something like 12 property proposals that have been ready for a day or two: Wikidata:Property proposal/Aosdána ID, Wikidata:Property proposal/CMI ID, Wikidata:Property proposal/CNT ID, Wikidata:Property proposal/Comédie-Française ID, Wikidata:Property proposal/Evene ID, Wikidata:Property proposal/FFF author ID, Wikidata:Property proposal/FFF character ID, Wikidata:Property proposal/GLAMOS ID, Wikidata:Property proposal/Marvel character ID, Wikidata:Property proposal/National Cartoonists Society ID and Wikidata:Property proposal/PRELIB ID. Would you min initiating one or two? Thierry Caro (talk) 07:37, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And I'll now take Wikidata:Property proposal/ANZL ID, Wikidata:Property proposal/CNL ID, Wikidata:Property proposal/LARB ID, Wikidata:Property proposal/New Zealand Book Council ID, Wikidata:Property proposal/PRELIB ID or Wikidata:Property proposal/RSL ID if you have time for some of them. That would be awesome. Thierry Caro (talk) 12:33, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much! They are now already used on the French Wikipedia. Thierry Caro (talk) 18:45, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, glad to help! ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:47, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I may again need your help for Wikidata:Property proposal/Exoplanet Data Explorer ID, Wikidata:Property proposal/Extrasolar Planets Encyclopaedia ID and Wikidata:Property proposal/NASA Exoplanet Archive ID, with Wikidata:Property proposal/National Humanities Medal ID and Wikidata:Property proposal/Expedia hotel ID also waiting. Thierry Caro (talk) 07:22, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And I'll add Wikidata:Property proposal/France Musique ID and Wikidata:Property proposal/Académie française ID to the list! I guess it is both a good thing and a bad thing that we are reaching an all-time high in terms of properties waiting to be created. Thierry Caro (talk) 09:42, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ready properties in Wikidata:Property_proposal/Natural_science[edit]

Could you please create the properties that are ready in Wikidata:Property_proposal/Natural_science? It would be a great help for me if the OpenMath ID would be ready soon. Thank you.--Physikerwelt (talk) 06:38, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look I hope later today - if somebody else doesn't get to it first! ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:50, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your lexemes[edit]

Out of curiosity: do You follow 3-letters list of words for Scrabble? :) KaMan (talk) 06:22, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No - actually my sources was the UNIX system file /usr/share/dict/words, but cut down to words that I actually had ever seen used in English. ArthurPSmith (talk) 12:08, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Results from global Wikimedia survey 2018 are published[edit]

Hello! A few months ago the Wikimedia Foundation invited you to take a survey about your experiences on Wikipedia. You signed up to receive the results. The report is now published on Meta-Wiki! We asked contributors 170 questions across many different topics like diversity, harassment, paid editing, Wikimedia events and many others.

Read the report or watch the presentation, which is available only in English. Add your thoughts and comments to the report talk page. Feel free to share the report on Wikipedia/Wikimedia or on your favorite social media. Thanks!
--EGalvez (WMF)

19:25, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Links, blue[edit]

Would it work on "Yahoo! Japan Talent Database ID" id's ? dead links.

50.254.21.213 00:56, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The formatter URL has been removed for that property; I assume it could be updated to an archive.org url but was not for some reason, this should be discussed on the property talk page. Nothing I can do to help there. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:36, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

that is what i tried to ask the other guy,what is a formatter url and how did they do that ? 50.254.21.213 22:31, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You said

I updated the IMDB redirection to send 'ch' id's to archive.org, it seems to work (I tried the Harry Potter example linked above). 50.254.21.213 16:36, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, 404
https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-externalid-url/?p=345&url_prefix=https://www.imdb.com/&id=ch0000574

50.254.21.213 15:10, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ready property[edit]

Hi there!

After a week of discussion without any opposition, could you please create this property?

Regards,

Nomen ad hoc (talk) 07:36, 7 October 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Wikidata:Lexicographical data/Statistics/AutoGenerated[edit]

Can You help me? I added fifth table to this page but for unknown reason it is not updated by bot. I have no idea why. Query works fine at query.wikidata.org. KaMan (talk) 12:03, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@KaMan: Hmm, maybe there's a limit to how many tables it can do in one page? I created Wikidata:Lexicographical data/Statistics/Test and that one works?? ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:01, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

url encoding for & and = in formatter URL for P6059[edit]

Hi,

We have some trouble in the new Biographie vosgienne ID (P6059) in the url.

The regex is [1-9]\d*&id_bio=[1-9]\d* and the value is for exemple 4317&id_bio=3394 . But the final url is https://www.ecrivosges.com/vosgiens/bio.php?id=4317%26id_bio%3D3394&biochrono=Biographie when it should be https://www.ecrivosges.com/vosgiens/bio.php?id=4317&id_bio=3394&biochrono=Biographie .

Is there a way to not url encode the value?

— eru [Talk] [french wiki] 09:17, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Eru: Ok, I've fixed it using the external ID redirector. You'll need to reload with URL suffix "?action=purge" on any items using this property to fix the URL's. ArthurPSmith (talk) 13:35, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks you! — eru [Talk] [french wiki] 13:38, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Arthur. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 16:26, 1 November 2018 (UTC).[reply]

humorous sense[edit]

Hi! Is there established term in English dictionaries to mean something like "humorous sense"? I tried to add English label and aliases to humorous (Q58233068) but I feel like they are wrong. Or could it be just "jokingly"? KaMan (talk) 14:08, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think the label is ok at least for now. "jokingly" might work too. I'm not aware of a standard term for this in English, and I just checked English wiktionary and couldn't find any cases where something like that was used. Humor covers a lot of territory - satire, puns, metaphor, etc. so I'm not sure if it's really a good way to characterize a lexeme sense, but maybe if I saw a good example... ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:55, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It is very popular signature in Polish dictionaries. It's also used in Polish wiktionary (see linking). I used it in park sztywnych (L35366) which seriously means "cemetery", "graveyard" but jokingly means "park of rigids". KaMan (talk) 15:13, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Strange numbers in English senses[edit]

Hi! Have you noticed that numbers in this page from time to time decreasing instead of increasing? Are you removing some senses? Look into this table: https://ibb.co/mn2oLV I've marked in red when number of senses strangely decreased. I don't have much experience with query service and perhaps it is normal but also I wonder if it is something to worry about and should be directed to dev team. KaMan (talk) 10:04, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not me! It looks like it went down by over 100 at one point recently, that's very strange. I have occasionally deleted a sense from one lexeme where they were added incorrectly (for example to a verb when they should have been added to the noun homograph), but generally that just means removing from one place and adding to another, and normally I would just create a new sense on the initial one that was wrong, so that should NOT cause a total count decrease. Yes I think maybe there's something of concern there. Not sure how to track it down further... ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:22, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I remeber that you are doing less edits during weekends. So is it possible that you added 100 senses in last 24 hours (Saturday)? I don't think so. I observe recent changes in lexemes namespace and I noticed there was not so much movement in English lexemes from other users. I do not notice such unstability of counts in other automatic queries, only in English senses. KaMan (talk) 09:34, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Again from 2761 to 2697. I reported it here. KaMan (talk) 10:51, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Author disambiguator tool and WSes[edit]

Hi. <thoughts value="20c">Whilst I am unaware of the designed scope of the tool toollabs:author-disambiguator/ if it is going to act as a true disambiguation search tool, I would think that any person who has an author page at one of the Wikisources should be considered as worthy of being a hit on the tool's search results. Numerous of those people writing at WSes will not be traditional "authors" though will be writers in the sense of explorers, military officers, politicians, scientists, journalists, etc.</thoughts> Also, without exactly knowing the scope of your tool, I would like to flag a page like s:Littell's Living Age/Volume 135 as an example of a ToC for a journal, of which there are a large range of other samples that may be of interest, number of these will have red links, and many will have solutions for red links as we have done a lot of work in identifying these writers over time.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:07, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@billinghurst: Scope is currently only to cover authors of articles in scholarly journals (which have Wikidata items). However, I'd certainly be interested in expanding that to cover books and other sources. ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:43, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:ArthurPSmith/Archive/5&oldid=1128127384"